Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 08:19

I just got this email from Environmental Defense about their massive clusterfuck coal subsidy bill to 'deal' with global warming. They combine a nice defensive whine from Barbara Boxer and ED's Fred Krupp, as well as a pitch for Senators to buy blogads. I like how the criticism from Friends of the Earth is forcing the other side to actually start organizing. That's kind of neat.

Dear XXXXXXXX,
Senator Boxer and the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act have come under attack in ads placed on liberal blogs. Some blog posts have picked up on the claims in these ads (see http://www.dailykos.com/storyo... Environmental Defense has been defending the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act and the work of the EPW committee on these blogs and through posts on our own blog http://www.climate411.org, but we feel at this point it would be very helpful to have members of the Committee voice their support for Sen. Boxer, the committee, and the LWCSA. One idea we have would be to run ads on the blog sites and we would be happy to work with your office to arrange for filming of a short statement of support. Other ideas include a joint letter from the members of the committee who voted for the bill. The more members that would participate - the stronger the message (further details below).

Please let us know if you would consider participating in such an ad or taking other action. Time is of the essence. FYI - I am sending this message to all the offices that voted for the bill as well as other prominent supporters

-- There are growing calls in the liberal blogosphere for opposition to the bill; and a general push against passing any climate bill in this Congress. This position has NOT yet solidified, but will become orthodoxy if we do not present a counterview from respected pro-environment voices.

-- A major DailyKos contributor today (2/1/08) ran a full-throat expression of the FOE point view, directly attacking Sen. Boxer for wanting to move forward and for objecting to the FOE ads.

-- Environmental Defense and many other major environmental groups (Friends of the Earth is small and fairly isolated) are in favor of moving forward to get a strong bill like Lieberman-Warner. We may differ on details and areas which require improvement, but are still pushing for action in this Congress.

-- For scientific reasons, and to take advantage of political momentum (which should not be taken for granted), we think it is important to make a strong start on global warming by passing a bill like Lieberman-Warner this year. If there are more environmental supporters in Congress in the future, we can improve it, as we did the Clean Air Act and other important first steps. Delay only makes the solution harder and more expensive.

-- We need a strong voices to stand up for Sen. Boxer, the committee, the LWCSA, and for the importance of acting NOW on climate change. Environmental Defense is interested in running ads featuring that voice on the same blogs where the FOE ad is appearing.

I spoke to the kind and conservative Senator Amy Klobuchar at the Senate progressive media summit, and she said that a cap and trade system like the Warner-Lieberman bill will work because something like it has worked with sulfur dioxide and acid rain. Only, you can't substitute out carbon like you can the industrial chemicals she referred to, which changes the economics radically (among other problems). All of which is to say that there is immensely conventional and dangerous thinking going on inside the Senate.

Sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide are really much less analogous than the cap-and-trade set seems to acknowledge.

Also, I love to see that ED is still so clueless about framing. They seem to mention "Lieberman-Warner" every chance they get, and (assuming they're not just doing that because this email is targeted to Senate insiders) you almost couldn't think of a worse pairing of Senators to give credibility to your environmental bill among knowledgeable liberals. Moreover, listing the Senators' names brands their messaging as technocratic egocentrism, when referring to it as "Climate Security" alone would evoke much more powerful frames.

Cap and trade is good for what it is (a way to get markets to help encourage less CO2) but (a) in this case there's a maximum value for the credits that undermines the whole system and (b) there needs to be a straight up carbon tax too.

Not defending this bill (it's terrrrrrible) but cap and trade should be part of the real legislation the Congress should pass.